UTILITARIANISM

Our world is governed by rules, either implied or implemented, and early on we are taught to live
by these rules. Society expects us to act in such a way that will conform to these rules in order to
live happy, harmonious lives.
We do things, careful not to break any of the rules that might hurt or cause harm to others.
Sometimes though, we do things not in accordance with the rules but based on what we feel is
the right thing to do.
Some people believe that it is morally right to break a rule in order to do a greater good. With
this argument, it becomes morally right to steal food or medicine to save a life. But then, will it
be also morally right to kill a paedophile in order to save children from being harmed by him?
The discussion and argument continues as long as people have different views on morality and
the proper way to act in society.
Some people adhere to the belief that the moral significance of an action is determined by its
outcome. They believe that the greatest pleasure of the greatest number of people should be the
result of the action that you make which will render it morally right. This theory or belief is
called utilitarianism.
Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that determines right from wrong by focusing on outcomes. It is a form
of consequentialism.

Utilitarianism holds that the most ethical choice is the one that will produce the greatest good for the
greatest number. It is the only moral framework that can be used to justify military force or war. It is
also the most common approach to moral reasoning used in business because of the way in which it
accounts for costs and benefits.

Distinction between Bentham and Mill’s version of Utilitarianism

Bentham’s theory
Act Utilitarianism
- is the belief that it is the right action that brings the greatest happiness to the greatest
number of people. It is a concept that believes that the morality of an action is
determined by its usefulness to most of the people that this act is in accordance with
the moral rules since it brings greater good or happiness.
- What is believed to be right or wrong is based on the effect or consequence. The
greatest good is depending on whomever or whatever will be benefited the most from
the act. It is a more results-oriented theory.
- Consequentialism
- Consequentialism is an ethical theory that judges whether or not something is right by
what its consequences are. For instance, most people would agree that lying is wrong.
But if telling a lie would help save a person’s life, consequentialism says it’s the right
thing to do.
 - Act utilitarianism first looks into the consequences of an act. The one with the better
consequence is most likely the good choice
John Stuart’s Theory

Rule utilitarianism

- It is the belief that an action can be morally right if it conforms to the rules that will
lead to the greatest good or happiness. It adheres to the belief that the correctness of
an action is determined by the correctness of its rules and that if the correct rule is
followed, the greatest good or happiness is achieved.
- These rules can include rules of conduct and similar principles. It is a more idealistic
and rigid theory wherein an act is interpreted to be either right or wrong depending on
the result of the agreed rule. Believers of this form of utilitarianism don’t want to
break the rules that are agreed upon by the majority.
- It is a concept that believes that although following the rules does not always produce
the greatest good, not following it will not produce the greatest good either. In the
end, rule utilitarianism can become an act utilitarianism because when breaking
a rule produces a greater good, a sub rule can be made to handle exceptions.
- Rule utilitarianism looks first into the consequences of choosing what rule to follow.
Following a rule that generates the greatest utility or happiness is the more correct
choice.

Example:
You are a doctor who have seen and examined a patient who did not know yet that he is having
an incurable terminal illness. The dilemma you’ll face is if you’re going to inform this person
that he is dying or not. If you observe the principles of the act utilitarian theory, you are going
to lie and not tell your patient about his sickness. This is the right thing to do because
telling the truth will immediately cause more pain and depression, not only to the patient
but also to his family. Lying will give him more time to enjoy life until
the symptoms become more and more noticeable.
However, if you are a believer of rule utilitarianism then you will not have any reservations
in telling the patient immediately about his sickness. Rule utilitarianism thinks more of the
long term and that it is your obligation to tell the truth to your patient no matter what the
circumstance because it is your duty and it is a rule for you to be honest at all times.
Distinctions
Bentham's theory applied the principle of utility to individual acts and situations directly. This meant
that some abhorrent acts were permitted. E.g. two torturers may be justified in their activity if their
pleasure outweighs the harm done to the victim. Mill developed rule utilitarianism to avoid this. Mill
suggested that the principle of utlity should be used to determine moral rules which govern utility. E.g.
Do not kill people (as killing people tends to lower net utility). This seems like an improvement, but
there are situations where breaking the rule increases utility - where it may be expedient to break them,
to put it Mill's way. Not to do this is to worship the rules rather than the principle of utility itself. In
order to avoid rule worship the theory collapses into act utlitarianism, as we have to make exceptions to
every occasion of this sort. 

Utilitarianism was first theorised by Jeremy Bentham, who devised a 'hedonic calculus' to measure ways
in which an action could cause a greater amount of pleasure. He devised a criteria which tested seven
different aspects of the pleasure. For example, the 'intensity' measured how strong the pleasure was,
whereas the 'extent' measured how many people would be affected by the action. But Bentham's
utilitarianism runs into problems, since actions such as torturing an innocent person could be morally
justifiable in his view if it caused greater happiness for the people torturing him. So Mill, building on
Bentham's utilitarianism, takes a slightly different strategy. Rather than posit a hedonic calculus, Mill
thought there was a distinction between higher pleasures and lower pleasures. Higher pleasures would
refer to scholarly pursuits or altruism, like reading philosophy or giving to charity, whereas lower
pleasures involve base pleasures like sex or eating food. Mill not only thought that higher pleasures
were much more valuable than lower pleasures, but also thought that it was better to "be a human
dissatisfied than a pig satisfied". This means Mill's account of utilitarianism not only focuses on bringing
about the most pleasurable outcome like Bentham's, but pays more attention on the type of pleasure
one brings about.
CRITIQUE OF UTILITARIANISM
1. The utilitarian insistence on equality and impartiality is both one of utilitarianism’s greatest
strengths and of its weaknesses.
 Justice as impartiality presumes that people living in a community share a common
GOOD.
 Deontologist John Rawls criticize Bentham’s classical utilitarian for its failure which is
to take seriously distinction between persons.
 “Different people, have different needs and different projects or goals”
 Justice according to Rawls, demands not simply impartially but also treating the people
fairly and proportionately to their needs and merits.
 Utilitarian are not concerned with what a person achieves or deserves but with whether
rewarding a person produces the most utility.

2. In their concern for maximizing the happiness of the greatest number, utilitarian’s fails to give
sufficient attention to the integrity of the individual.
 Integrity or honesty and personal responsibility need to be taken into consideration when
determining the rightness or wrongness of an action.
 Utilitarianism sometimes requires an individual to act against its integrity and
conscience.
 Actions do not just happen, each of us is responsible for what we do as individuals
.
3. Utilitarianism does not give sufficient attention to the role of the moral sentiments.
 According utilitarian such as Jeremy Bentham, feelings such as guilt or regret are morally
relevant only if they are based on a certain characteristics of the situation which tend to
promote pleasure and pain. (while some people believe that moral sentiments do matter)
 Utilitarianism, by telling individuals to ignore or try to overcome their feelings (moral
repugnance) towards certain actions.
 Which detach people not only to their personal responsibilities to their actions but also to
their moral sentiments and conscience.

4. Utilitarianism may impose an impossible standard by requiring that we act in the ways that
maximize happiness.
 People may agree that it is good to act through happiness or to promote happiness, to
avoid causing pain to others and to expect people to do always what can make the
greatest number of people happy which can lessen their burdens in life.
 Which would leave individuals to have no more time to their personal happiness, their
personal life or their own enjoyment.

** Which Mill responded to this criticism: This criticism is based on a misinterpretation

of utilitarianism theory. The purpose of utilitarian ethics, he pointed out, is the
“multiplication of happiness” rather than the maximization of happiness in all cases. To
expect people to always act to maximize happiness for the greatest number is simply
 unrealistic. Mill also contended that taking care of ourselves and those close to us
contributes to maximizing common good.

5. If people do not have intrinsic moral value, they can be used as a means only.
 Most philosophers, however, believe that it is wrong to use a person only as a means,
regardless of the consequences in or for the community.
 One of the weakness of Bentham’s strict utilitarianism, if the goal of morality is to
maximize the total utility of the community, there are times that in a society just to
achieve happiness they are doing something that can ruin someone’s life (scapegoating or
punishing an innocent person). Doing this thing involves ignoring the person’s right or its
liberty right in order to maximize utility ~ a conclusion that Mill, in his reformulation of
Bentham’s theory. (objectionable)

6. Utilitarianism has been accused of committing the naturalistic fallacy.

 Moore claims that utilitarianism commits naturalistic fallacy, which is good is not based
on observation about the world but instead intuitively known (to understand something
without any direct evidence or reasoning process) or self-evident.
 Moore argued that we cannot go from an observation about what is (we seek pleasure and
avoid pain) to a statement what ought to be (we ought to maximize pleasure and
minimize pain).
 She alleged that utilitarian is flawed because it is based on naturalistic fallacy which is
one the reason why modern philosophers disfavor utilitarianism.

7. The primary weakness of utilitarianism is not its claim that consequences are important in
morality but that only consequences matter.
 Utilitarian theory is not wrong but it is incomplete, the simplicity, which is one of its
most attractive features, is also one of its weakness.